Practical Counter to Pearl II

@ponef In regards to what? This thread kind of wound up diverting itself in like 3 different directions:

Whether UK should retake Egypt B1 Vs. send the FTR from the India Carrier over to the US Pearl Harbor Fleet. Whether Japan should attack the Pearl Harbor Fleet, the UK India Fleet, or both on J1. Whether UK should attack Borneo B1 or not.

The answer to basically all of these boiled down to some combination of “it depends on how the dice went G1” and “are you playing under WBC Rules or not”. Seeing as WBC no longer runs tournaments for Revised (or any A&A, for that matter), we’re left to assume all games being played will be OOB rules (or at least LHTR), in which case Egypt suddenly becomes much less of a priority in the grand scheme of things.

Personally, I got to try the strategy out at the 2018 WBC in one of my games. It worked well for me, as Japan was routinely baited into attacking the USN, losing the TT and the DD in the process. This allowed me to wipe out the remaining IJN Fleet A1 (Bomber from East USA + FTR from West USA + Navy from US West Coast + FTR from Hawaii). This crippled the IJN and let me rapidly come to dominate the Pacific.

that is a pretty bad plan

On R1, I usually buy 3 inf 3 tanks

on R2 I usually 4 inf + art + ftr

if he buys 16 tanks on G2, the game should be over, as long as you create stacks, and dont lose battles (you should never lose battles, if you do, then you placed your units wrong, or are in a no retreat scenario)

just buy like 8 inf + 1 tank or so, you should be fine on R3

quite simply, transports have to be defended, and the allies can put have in range alot of threatening airpower before japan’s second turn…  and every ship that’s left defending them reduces your ability to cheaply destroy the various allied fleets that might be making a mess in the pacific on turn one.

Other than that, the additional transports allow for 6 units a turn, similarly to the IC’s.  The additional transports give you the ability to grab guys more quickly from the islands, as well as the ability to push on india and africa faster and harder.  But each of these require some tradeoffs (ideally, mass troops in manchuria, but if india looms you may have to deal with that, slowing the flow of 6 units/per turn.

transports assuming a factory build later also ends up reducing the flow of fast moving armor, if that’s necessary.

Don’t get me wrong, i’m a big fan of transports, but they have their drawbacks too.

@Crazy:

:-o
71Boomer,
  Was that a cat call?
Did you just cat call Jennifer?
Careful my friend, there are some big dogs on here that might start barking at you for that.
Not that Jennifer can’t handle you all by herself, but some guys love to jump in to fight for the ladies anyway. :wink:
I smite you for the “Cat Call”!  :wink:
It was funny though  :-)

. . . smites Crazy Ivan for chauvinism and for that whole vague “big dog” reference.

Feel the wrath of Bunny P!

I said it wasn’t going great, but it’s not a done deal because you don’t have it to take Berlin, not before Russia goes.

Generally speaking, if allies let G have afr then in most cases axis win.

The UK sub and trans in Australia have no place in my overall strat, so might as well use it to weaken Jap a little bit.
The Borneo attack is a tricky one, 4 ipc is very tempting, and leaving the AC in Philli to block for Jap retake on J1.
Afr is much more important so one has to look at the map, if G didn’t attack Anglo then Afr is secure, but in most
cases allies should land in Afr with both US+UK. rnd 1.
Sometimes, to take 2 inf from Aus+NZ and move the trans to Afr can be a smart move.
I won’t do this if the sub attack went wrong…

As Jap I don’t care if UK got NG, I wanna kill those trans, but the 1 ipc is no big deal.
Landing the India ftr on the US AC is not a good move imo. I use it in Afr, or with DD in sz59, sometimes I land
that ftr in Bury. The India ftr can land in Cauc together with UK bmr, and 2 ftr from london, (UK1 to WRU) might do a 4 air units
attack to the G med fleet in UK2/UK3, before axis merge their fleets, this is something I usually hate as allies.
If all 3 ftrs land in WRU then they’re set for a baltic wipeout UK2, presuming G didn’t buy any naval units in sz5.  :wink:

To have the US trade Italy and UK trading WE means birdy for allies  :-)

@Jennifer:

As the allies, how do you counter the German 1 build:

3 Transports, 1 Aircraft Carrier, built in SZ 5. (+2 Fgt from the mainland.)

Assume a standard 6 or 7 IPC bid to Africa to close Egypt.  All fighters and bomber not on carriers in WE and the Med fleet in SZ 13 (SS, Trn, BB because odds of the defender getting two hits is almost nil when you attack it heavy with your own BB.)

9 Victory Cities or more: Play more aggressive with Russia to the south.  Have US & UK build a Sub instead of a Transport, or upgrade one to a Destroyer.  I anticipate the difficulties Germany introduced to US and the UK will be offset by the lack of pressure against Russia.

8 Victory Cities: …um… KJF?  shrug  Germany just built a nice bridge from Berlin to Leningrad.  I have doubts that Russia can hold it in the short term.  Perhaps I would protect against Sea Wolf, and try and defend Calcutta.  I don’t know.  Have set up a board and think about it.

Sealion is not the way to go.

1. Odds not in your favor: A. survives: 22%  D. survives: 73%
2. If you fail, you have just lost the game.
3. If you succeed, you will have lost more units than the money you will get from UK, while letting Russia get ahead in the builds.
4. You will lose Gbr against the UK or US counterattacks. If you retake it, you will lose it again.

According to odds and some of my calculations, this strategy will win you the game less than 20% of the time.